Manufacturers are under pressure to share EPDs. But it’s not easy
Architects, engineers, and contractors (AECs) increasingly rely on environmental product data when specifying materials. Public procurement and certification schemes such as LEED and BREEAM demand verified, product-specific information. Internally, sustainability and product teams are expected to deliver this data faster, across more products, and with fewer resources.
The expectations around EPD availability and usability have changed dramatically in recent years. Designers no longer want PDFs buried on websites. They need environmental data that can be accessed, compared, and trusted within their existing tools and workflows.
At the same time, regulatory pressure is increasing globally. Requirements around traceability, consistency, and transparency are becoming stricter, while reporting frameworks continue to evolve. For many manufacturers, this creates a growing operational burden.
EPDs often exist as static PDF files, managed through consultants, spreadsheets, or disconnected systems. Updating them is slow. Reusing the same data for multiple purposes: EPDs, LCAs (Lifecycle assessments), internal reporting, BIM publishing - often means repeating the same work. Small changes can trigger great manual efforts, increasing the risk of errors and inconsistencies.
When environmental data is fragmented like this, it loses much of its value. Instead of supporting design decisions and market access, it becomes a bottleneck. For BPMs working at scale, this approach simply doesn’t hold up.
For a broader perspective, explore how BIM, EPD, and LCA work together in our guide: BIM, EPD, and LCA: Your blueprint for regulatory compliance and market visibility